Legal Challenge to Children's Centre Closures Fails

Judicial review dismisses case against Ealing Council

Save Our Children's Centres supporters demonstrate in front of the High Court. Picture: Facundo Arrizabalaga/MyLondon

April 17, 2026

A judicial review launched by the parents of a two-year-old, against Ealing Council’s plans to close children’s centres, has been dismissed in its entirety.

In June 2025, Ealing Council announced plans to close 12 of the borough’s 25 children’s centres. This was later reduced to ten closures.

The case was heard at the High Court between February 24 and 25 with the decision being made public on Thursday, April 16. The Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) understands that the claimant is considering launching an appeal.

Lawyers for the child and their parents argued the case on three grounds.

Claim one: they alleged that Ealing Council had pre-determined the decision to close ten centres before holding a public consultation.

The evidence? Lawyers claimed the fact the savings from the proposed closures were baked into the budget meant that the council had already decided upon the closures – effectively meaning the consultation was not meaningful, rather a tick box exercise.

Claim two: the consultation materials failed to explain why specific centres were chosen for closure versus remaining open, leaving the public unable to comprehensively respond to the consultation.

Claim three: under Section 5A(1) of the Childcare Act 2006, local authorities must ensure “sufficient provision of children’s centres to meet local need”. The claimant argued that the council failed to produce evidence that outcomes for children would not be negatively impacted by the closures.

On claim one, Mr Justice Kimblin rejected the argument, ruling that “the budgetary process was not a thing that was done which required prior consultation” because the budget was merely a proposal at that stage. The judge emphasised that the fact the council reduced the number of closures after the consultation phase meant that the outcome was not pre-determined.

On claim two, the judge found that the council provided an adequate amount of information. He stated that the process generated a “two-way flow of information, which is the essence of the process”, and that it successfully prompted “many articulate and intelligent responses which engaged fully with the issues, which in turn prompted material changes in the proposal”.

On claim three, the judge concluded that the council properly upheld the requirements of the act. He noted that determining sufficiency requires weighing geographical, demographic, and financial factors, and that “the claimant has identified no obvious logical error nor mistake of fact which would permit this court to intervene”.

Because Ealing Council acted lawfully within its discretion across all three issues, the claim for judicial review was dismissed.

The LDRS understands that the claimant is considering launching a further appeal. In a statement shared with the LDRS, Save Ealing Children’s Centres said the group is disappointed at the verdict.

“Despite the legal case failing, we feel proud of our achievements as a campaign group in having fought against the closures. Every avenue to challenge this decision was used: inviting the council to engage with SECC as one of 30 local groups and organisations (which was declined), attending and asking questions at Full Council and scrutiny meetings, holding protests, contacting individual councillors and MPs until finally when all avenues exhausted, a parent on behalf of their child decided to take Ealing Council to the High Court for a Judicial Review…

“Throughout this process, Ealing Council has repeatedly and publicly stated that their decision to close or repurpose these ten children’s centres was part of a strategy to enhance the Early Help Offer, and services to families of young children will improve. However, SECC has never felt that sufficient evidence has been provided to demonstrate that this would improve services.

“Ealing Council claim their decision will increase access for children and families to children’s centre services through outreach and extended hours at the remaining centres. We maintain that the better way of improving the provision is to keep the centres open but to consider ways of improving access and engagement.”

They added: “Regardless, Save Ealing Children’s Centres will continue to monitor how well Ealing Council meet their professed publicly declared aims to meet local need, improve early help – increase children’s centres’ reach, reduce the number of children and families needing a higher level of support and intervention though the closure of 10 children’s centres.”

A spokesperson for Ealing Council said,“The council’s priority is to ensure that families can access appropriate early help support across the borough, whether that’s through children’s centres or other community venues, depending on what best meets the needs of families and young people.

“We welcome the High Court’s judgment. More than 2,000 residents took part in the consultation on the Improved Early Help Offer, and their feedback helped shape the decision. We are pleased that this has been recognised by the court.

“The legal challenge has been a costly and time-consuming process, and our plans to improve early help services were paused as a result. We can now resume the work needed to implement the changes.”

Philip James Lynch - Local Democracy Reporter